Chomsky the Latest Jewish Thinker Targeted by Israel

RAMALLAH – When internationally renowned linguist,
philosopher, and political analyst Noam Chomsky was barred from entering
the West Bank, he joined a chorus of Jewish intellectuals savaged by
the Israeli government for outspoken criticism.

Chomsky, a strong proponent of Palestinian rights, tried to cross into
the occupied Palestinian West Bank from Jordan on Sunday to deliver a
speech at the Birzeit University near Ramallah.

He was held for several hours and interrogated as to why he was only
giving a speech in the Palestinian territories and not in Israel, and
then turned away.

“I find it hard to think of a similar case, in which entry to a person
is denied because he is not lecturing in Tel Aviv. Perhaps only in
Stalinist regimes,” Chomsky told the Israeli daily Ha’aretz.

Several years ago, Norman Finkelstein, a respected American academic and
political analyst, was interrogated for a number of hours at Ben Gurion
International airport before he was refused entry by Israel’s domestic
intelligence agency, the Shin Bet. Finkelstein believes he was targeted
due to his harsh criticism of Israel for its war on Gaza.

Richard Falk, professor emeritus of international law at Princeton
University and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in
the Palestinian Territories, was expelled when he tried to enter Israel
in 2008.

“I was leading a mission that had intended to visit the West Bank and
Gaza to prepare a report on Israel’s compliance with human rights
standards and international humanitarian law,” said Falk.

But it appears the Israeli government and the Israel lobby have
reserved their most vituperative attacks for South African Justice
Richard Goldstone, who was appointed by the UN to investigate war
crimes during Israel’s devastating assault on Gaza from December 2008
to January 2009.

The Israelis refused to cooperate with his investigation and prevented
him from entering Gaza from Israel. He had to enter via Egypt.

Goldstone, an internationally respected jurist, served as the chief
prosecutor of the UN International Criminal Tribunals for the former
Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

His criticism of Israeli war crimes committed in Gaza provoked Israeli
apologists to accuse him of being a “hanging judge,” relating to a
number of black South Africans who were sentenced to death under his
rulings.

However, Goldstone argued that under prevailing South African law at
the time when a murder had been committed in a gratuitous manner with
no mitigating circumstances judges had no option other than to sentence
the guilty to death.

Former South African Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson who defended
victims of the apartheid policies leaped to Goldstone’s defense.

“It is absolute nonsense to say that Justice Goldstone took the side of
the racist policies of the apartheid regime. He was one of a small
group of judges who did their best to mitigate the harshness of
apartheid, and when we went to court to defend victims of apartheid in
criminal cases or to make claims on their behalf in the civil courts he
was one of the judges that we hoped would hear our cases.”

Former South African president Nelson Mandela, arguably one of Africa’s
finest liberation heroes, thought highly enough of Goldstone to appoint
him to post-apartheid South Africa’s newly-established constitutional
court.

Mandela had previously appointed Goldstone chair of inquiry into human
rights abuses committed by South Africa’s various political factions in
1991.

One of Goldstone’s chief criticisms of Israel’s military operation in
Gaza was its deliberate and wanton destruction of civilian
infrastructure with no specific military purpose.

Goldstone stated, “None of the Israeli responses have even said a word
about the property destruction, the bulldozing of agricultural fields,
the bombing of water wells, and the bombing of sewage works that caused
a huge spill over a huge area. There has been no attempt to justify
that.”

Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report last week backing
Goldstone’s investigation despite Israeli claims that its forces only
destroyed civilian property when armed Palestinian groups were using
the facilities.

“Almost 16 months after the war, Israel has not held accountable troops
who unlawfully destroyed swathes of civilian property in areas under
their control,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at HRW.

HRW further documented the complete destruction of 189 buildings,
including 11 factories, eight warehouses, and 170 residential buildings
– roughly 5 percent of the total property destroyed in Gaza –
leaving at least 971 people homeless.

Satellite imagery corroborated eyewitness accounts that Israeli forces
destroyed many structures after establishing control over an area and
shortly before Israel announced a cease-fire and withdrew its forces
from Gaza on Jan. 18, 2009.

Israeli forces were following the Dahiya Doctrine established after
Israel’s 2006 war with Lebanon when a Hezbollah stronghold in the West
Beirut suburb of Dahiya was almost completely razed by the Israeli
Defense Forces (IDF).

“What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in
every village from which Israel is fired on,” said Gadi Eisenkot, head
of the IDF’s northern division.

“This is not a recommendation. This is
a plan. And it has been approved,” he added.

Israeli leader retired Col. Gabriel Siboni, stated the following, weeks
before the Israeli military’s attack on Gaza: “With an outbreak of
hostilities, the IDF will use force that is disproportionate to the
enemy’s actions and the threat it poses. Such a response aims at
inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will
demand long and expensive reconstruction processes.”